[chr|s sedition]

Originally Posted by bigred875

if you want to blame anyone for this particular incident....start with the criminal who commited the crime, then look at his parents, teachers and advisers....the signs were all there and ignored.

bingo.

[chr|s sedition]

Originally Posted by bigred875

you dont need sources to back up common sense....bottom line is if more people had guns on them there would be less people commiting crimes using a gun. Criminals will think twice about mugging someone if the chances were good the victim was also packing. not all, but there would be a significant reduction.

Tenents of Basic Common Knowledge:
(1) Gangs are criminals.
(2) Gangs have guns.
(3) Most inner city gun violence is between gang members (or people hit by bad aim).

Conclusion:
(1) Gangs, knowing that rival gangs have guns, still shoot at other gang members.
(2) Thus, your "common sense" idea that "Criminals will think twice about mugging someone if the chances were good the victim was also packing" is shown, daily, to not have any substative deterrence to crime.

[Josephd14]

Originally Posted by Stoneman

And where's YOUR citing, Ben? For every link you find stating this, I can find one saying just the opposite. One case in point comes to mind right quick...New Hampshire. Our violent crime rate ain't exactly skyrocketting...[/url]

Don't worry Jay, With all the MASS implants moving up there it will rocket in no time, And in time NH will be a mirror image of MA..

[Stoneman]

Originally Posted by josephd14

Don't worry Jay, With all the MASS implants moving up there it will rocket in no time, And in time NH will be a mirror image of MA..

Yeah, no shit! It started years ago. Hell, anything south of Concord is pretty much Mass now. And now those transplants are in our legislature. Sucks...

[bbhzx10]

A definately didn't read anything but the first post so sorry if
I'm late! The only gun control issue in this case is why he was cleared to purchase the firearms with the obvious Psyc. issues and police reports. They should have caught that, those are the things that are relevent and that is why there is a background check in the first place.

[Josephd14]

I'm big on gun owner rights, brought up with guns my whole life, but i will say I do not think that someone who is not a LEGAL CITIZEN of this counrty, should be able to purchase anything but a sling shot.. how do you do a back ground check on someone that you can't check thier whole back ground..

[joeswamp]

Do you guys think that woulda mattered? There are so many guns floating around that the guy could have privately bought an illegal one almost immediately.

That's always the problem with gun laws in this country. Illegal guns are so easy to get that it doesn't really matter what the laws are. Guns are a little like marijuana... Imagine if marijuana was illegal for only 50% of the population, and there were stores openly selling it to the other 50%. How long do you think it would take you to get some of the good stuff if you were in the illegal 50%?

In order to regulate something, you have to first make sure there aren't huge black markets.

[bbhzx10]

I doubt a better background check would have helped this situation, but I do think it was an obvious failure of that system. I don't think any of the gun control systems they put on legal purchases prevent problems like this, I feel they should punish crimes commited with firearms more harshly instead of making life difficult for someone with no record that likes to shoot at the local club. And I do believe this particular guy was a citizen that moved here as a child, I think I saw that on the news but I could be wrong

[MissTwisties]

Originally Posted by josephd14

I'm big on gun owner rights, brought up with guns my whole life, but i will say I do not think that someone who is not a LEGAL CITIZEN of this counrty, should be able to purchase anything but a sling shot.. how do you do a back ground check on someone that you can't check thier whole back ground..

I'm a permanent resident of the US, not yet a citizen. And I eventually want to buy a gun, have a problem with that?

Seriously tho, I'd love to go to a range and shoot, I was going with my dad when I was younger and it was so much fun.

[hammadown]

Well this is probably not the best place to post my first message but I think this is a great topic. I have to agree with those who believe everyone should be allowed to carry, however with exceptions. Naturally you have to be a law abiding citizen, no criminal record...the usual that common sense would deam appropriate for gun ownership. Its been said before, but I'll say it again, the criminals on the majority do not go through legal means to get weapons. Put all the restrictions you want, itll just be more illegal guns against less legal ones. One legal owner out of the millions out there goes on a rampage and makes the news and suddenly no more guns. Dont you think joe criminal whould think twice about hold up the bank if there might be other people with guns? I have spoken with several POs about this and most support the idea of more legal people carrying.

Here's a little interesting thing to think about: I am from Maine where I could walk in with a drivers licence and in about 30mins walk out with whatever gun I want. There is an average of 1 gun per person in the state. Yet in 2003 maine had the lowest rate per capita for gun use in violent crimes in the country. Its not the laws that are flawed nor the guns.

Sorry to make enemies on my first post!

[Brian_C6]

Handguns and Rifles were designed for recreation use and personal protection. As Americans, we should have a right to own them. Comparing these types of guns to mass destruction weapons designed specifically for mass murder is completely obserd. I am pro-firearm but I'm anti-automatic weapon. In my opinion, there is no real legitiment reason to have an automatic weapon as a citizen / resident in any state. Auto weapons should ONLY be used in War (by trained proffessionals - Army/Navy/Marines) because these weapons were designed for mass murder. When you are talking about a massive threat (another army, many people, many guns) we need weapons to stop it.

In a nutshell, I see no point in having the ability to carry automatic weapons (or any other weapon of mass murder) unless you are exposed to mass quantities of people looking to harm you / your family / your people / your country.

Brian

[mostly.lurking]

When you say "automatic weapon" are you referring to an actual NFA registered "Machine gun", or a semi-automatic weapon, ie. one trigger pull, one shot?



I look at all of this from the perspective of "what have I done that would make the state tell me I can't have one of these", whether it is a firearm, motorcycle, automobile, etc. I am a law abiding citizen. I am a responsible gun owner. If I want to own a rifle to take to a range to shoot, whether it be a Ruger 77/22, Barrett M82A1, or an NFA registered, lawfully owned M16, what have I done that would preclude the lawful use of said firearm.

In all reality, I don't see any difference between being told what guns I can or cannot have and what size engine I can have in my car or motorcycle. I haven't done anything wrong.

[richw]

Bunky you and your family are alone in the world.

Cops aren't all blue knights. Their mission is to be outside behind their squad car. They want to go home tonight and be with their families. Your problem with that gun man is well; your problem. They also will not admit this but they are safer with less guns in the population, not that your more safe.

Politicians well same deal they are more safe on account a lot of them have armed escorts, same with celebrities. They are more safe and not you.

The lefty liberals are of course a pathetic echo of world wide communism. Funny how its fringes live on when the dark creature itself is all but dead. Anyway they always knew it would be easier to conquer the USA if they disarmed the citizens, hence lefty gun control. Putin is and old style Soviet so maybe USSR will be back. Hollywood left ...read above. The other commy echo is to remove religion which also removes a major prohibited from doing harm and removes the theoretical punishment of Divine retribution that used to prevent superpredators.

Lock and load and teach your children well.
Buy lots of carry capable semi autos and practice.

If you live in a city just think what happens when the power goes out

Have a nice day

[Currently]

It is against the law for an insane person to own a gun.

Yet this person clearly was insane.

He killed himself before a cop killed him.

Moral of the story ... the only way this clown was going to stop shooting
was if he met someone that could shoot better than him.

Read Ted Nugent's diatribe on "gun free zones" and how they attract these
crazy clowns.

He actually says that there was 7 or 8 such incidents that were stopped as
a direct result of someone having a gun and putting an immediate end to it.

Look at that Uptown Bar incident in Manchvegas 2 weekends ago.
Asshole was kicked out, goes to get his gun, fires in the bar and an armed
customer responded with two shots, one in the shooter's arm and one in the leg.
The idiot stops shooting and runs away to be found by Manchvegas finest a few
hundred yards away.

How much you want to bet if that no one was armed that night we would be
reading the obituaries right now.

The only way to stop a crazy person with a gun is to be there with a gun
when he is acting out.

Case Closed!

[SSearchVT]

I have a strong belief in the right to bear arms. My belief is just as strong that you need proper training and respect for those arms... In my opinion personal firearms are for sport (hunting, target practice, etc) and personal protection. I also feel that fully automatic firearms have little to no place in the hands of any one but active military and law enforcement.

What happened at VT was a tragedy to say the least - one person with a mission ended the lives of over 30 people and affected the lives of countless others.

He actually took the hard way to get the handguns - he filled out the paperwork - the easy way would have been to buy them on the street. Unfortunately the old statement 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' still holds true. It's impossible to say that if firearms weren't available this never would have happened - my belief is that he would have found another way to proceed with his mission. The number of affected individuals in the amount of time would most likely have been lower - but there would still be victims.

[Brian_C6]

Originally Posted by SSearchVT

I have a strong belief in the right to bear arms. My belief is just as strong that you need proper training and respect for those arms... In my opinion personal firearms are for sport (hunting, target practice, etc) and personal protection. I also feel that fully automatic firearms have little to no place in the hands of any one but active military and law enforcement.

I agree with this completely. We could look at owning a gun much like obtaining a drivers license. Adequate training with testing to obtain the license.... setting up the proper respect needed for the process and privilege to own.

[richw]

If you saw the BS that goes on in NY you would not advocate
government oversight of your rights

In NY applications get lost...many times
Denial occur without explanation.
If you are 100 OK you might still need to get an attorney and drop 5 large for your RIGHT

[Josephd14]

Originally Posted by Brian_C6

I agree with this completely. We could look at owning a gun much like obtaining a drivers license. Adequate training with testing to obtain the license.... setting up the proper respect needed for the process and privilege to own.

So your telling me people with Drivers Liceses are adequately trained?

[SilverDragon]

Originally Posted by Honclfibr

To me, guns are like religion. I don't care if you've got one or not, just don't go around waving it in everybody's face.

+1 dude. well said.

[Brian_C6]

Originally Posted by josephd14

So your telling me people with Drivers Liceses are adequately trained?

In some states people are trained. At the very least, people are "tested" before given a license. I know in NH the motorcycle test is pretty intense. In MA it was a joke.

It's like anything that posses a potential danger or threat to others.... people should receive some sort of training or education. If you want to fly a plane, you must receive training. And I know receiving an auto license or license to fly a plane is more of a priviledge (not a right) but how can a few hours of classroom style education and shooting range experience hurt people who want to carry a firearm. I look at this situation much like poverty... without education, these people can't get out of their own way. "Failure" is setup to occur.

Brian

[richw]

Remember the same people that would control you guns would certainly want to take away your STUNTA cycle

[Brian_C6]

Originally Posted by richw

Remember the same people that would control you guns would certainly want to take away your STUNTA cycle

How does owning, what you call a "stunta cycle" relate to training for gun ownership? The only way I could possibily relate your statement to this topic would be...
It's like saying, "The police would come to confiscate your old gun that you've used to shoot beer cans in your backyard."

Either you're under the assumption I partake in illegal activities or you disagree with the way I use my motorcycle. I'm assuming it's the later of the two reasons... because all my activities are legal.

Look, my argument simply calls for higher standards to be put in place to obtain a gun. It has nothing to do with the "type of" usage.... i.e. shooting range, hunting, protection, etc. When did I say the government should control guns? I merely stated I think government should control the process (or requirements) needed to obtain the guns... hense keeping mentally, physcially, or otherwise "challenged" people from owning and using incorrectly.

Brian

PS. To further "back" my opinion on this matter.... "If higher standards were set to obtain a motorcycle license and more training was required, we would have better motorcycle riders." Being a stunt rider myself and seeing some of the people who attempt to stunt... some of them shouldn't even be on a motorcycle, let alone attempt stunts. If we did a better job weeding out the idiots, we'd have less idiots, doing idiotic things. Now translate that to gun ownership.

[richw]

Once you cede control of your rights to someone else you lose those rights.

Your a Stunta so you risk your health and to some extent the safety of others to amuse yourself.

The same Government Control Mentality would save you and the citizens from your aberrant behavior.

The lefties practice incremental ism....each little step, each little power grab, all sounding vaguely sensible accumulate until your a subject not a freeman.

Even if you don't personally have a dog in the fight you need to always push back. After they have stripped someone else they will be coming for you.

[Brian_C6]

Originally Posted by richw

Your a Stunta so you risk your health and to some extent the safety of others to amuse yourself.

The same Government Control Mentality would save you and the citizens from your aberrant behavior.

You see, this is an assumption you've made about me that really gets under my skin. You assume I risk my health and the saftey of others to simply amuse myself? You've classified "stuntas" as unlawful, unsafe individuals, and you've put me in it. You don't even know me. I am a step 9, have no tickets, and when I "stunt", I do so in a closed course enviroment. Please tell me how what I do differs from any other extreme sport? FYI, I've also raced NESC and NEMA and let me tell you, stunting on a motorcycle is much safer than MotoX.

Now, if you want to talk about 20 year old rookie motorcycle riders who wear sunglasses, sneakers, no helmet, no gloves, and rip wheelies down the highway at 90mph to impress themselves and others, then that is a completely different story. Again, comparing that type of individual to me is like comparing the V-Tech shooter to an FBI agent. I have a ClearChannel XSBA license and I've competed on a national circuit. I've had sponsored deals with companies like Hindle, Motophoria, and Vanson. I've worked with Red Duc, Nault's Honda, and RedBull.

[sandman]

Originally Posted by Brian_C6

Handguns and Rifles were designed for recreation use and personal protection. As Americans, we should have a right to own them. Comparing these types of guns to mass destruction weapons designed specifically for mass murder is completely obserd. I am pro-firearm but I'm anti-automatic weapon. In my opinion, there is no real legitiment reason to have an automatic weapon as a citizen / resident in any state. Auto weapons should ONLY be used in War (by trained proffessionals - Army/Navy/Marines) because these weapons were designed for mass murder. When you are talking about a massive threat (another army, many people, many guns) we need weapons to stop it.

In a nutshell, I see no point in having the ability to carry automatic weapons (or any other weapon of mass murder) unless you are exposed to mass quantities of people looking to harm you / your family / your people / your country.

Brian

so i guess no one should be allowed to own or drive a truck or car, seeing as there even more of a weapon of mass murder than a select fire rifle ever would be.

as too proffessionals? who are they? are they the people who receive minimal training on a cold range and aren't trusted to have loaded fireams other than on a fireing line?


if you build it they will come.

any time you have a vdz (victim disarmament zone) filled with sheep predetors will come and kill them.

there's nothing anyone can do about it! nothing!

when predetors come to kill sheep, your only recourse is to kill them first!